Can WebM already be called an open standard?
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Sat Feb 5 20:47:47 UTC 2011
* J. B. Nicholson-Owens:
> micu wrote:
>> But what would you say: Can criterion 4 (managed and further developed
>> independently of any single vendor in aw process open to the equal
>> participation of competitors and third parties) already be identified to
>> be true?
> I think I don't understand what criterion 4 is meant to address nor do I
> see how an unencumbered from-scratch implementation would not qualify as
> satisfying criterion 4.
Another implementation does not change and improve the standard.
The standard remains unchanged.
IMHP, the whole concept is probably quite pointless. After all, C# is
an open standard, but Emacs Lisp is not. And neither are TeX nor
LaTeX. To me, it doesn't seem to be a useful category to think in.
More information about the Discussion